1) The events, Key Pressed, Button Clicked, etc, all say to only register for the event when it is needed, due to network traffic.
Does this mean you should use the event in the trigger if you really need it, or that you should have as many conditions as possible with the event. Does it still generate traffic if the condition fails? Does having a condition to narrow down the number of calls make any difference in terms of performance?
2) Is there any difference in terms of performance when using custom script versus UI?
Vexal Team Survival is a Hero Defense map. Hero Defense is a genre borrowed from Warcraft 3.
The goal of Vexal Team Survival is to stay as true as possible to the genre as it was in Warcraft. I will not be attempting to reinvent the genre from the ground up. That will be a job for maps released later in the span of Starcraft 2's lifetime. Instead, I have selected a few choice concepts to innovate and redesign, which were either completely impossible in the Warcraft editor, or too difficult and impractical to implement.
Currently, these choice design elements encompass:
- The Hero's control system. No, I will not be implementing a WASD movement scheme. I am not ready to reveal exactly how it will work.
- Hero weapon system. Given that Starcraft 2 has such a robust weapon system, this choice is a give-in.
- Hero spell / attack system. Again, I am not ready to reveal how it will work.
The above areas will be completely different than that of the traditional Hero Defense. As for the rest of the map, it will be polished with little additions that were not possible in Warcraft.
Areas which I have not yet finalized:
- Equipment / Item system.
- I would like to have a player-versus-player element. I am currently bouncing around ideas in my head. However, I will not force a system into the map just "because" if it does not feel smooth and connected.
While I am building off a genre I did not invent, I do not like to implement gameplay elements which were a unique, defining feature of a map released prior. People ask me, "Why don't you have interest in your TD?" "Why don't you have a mineral bank?" This is why.
What I need:
I normally work alone, and am more than capable of handling any aspect of the design and creation of map (or game in general), both technical and gameplay wise. However, my tower defense took more than two months (I began work in the beginning of June); I am obsessively meticulous; I scrutinize of every minute detail until I feel it perfect. I will not be accepting work from others (including custom assets, such as models or textures). The most difficult part of developing a game is the design. And making it fun. I do need a few people who are capable of blunt honesty, whom I can present versions of my map, or drafts of gameplay mechanics, and receive feedback on whether I designed a fun mechanism, or simply got carried away with attempting an impressive technical feat (which I often end up doing).
If you would like to fill this position, either post here, PM me here, email vexal525@gmail.com , or PM Vexal 525 in-game. I will contact you when I have some thing to test.
I will be updating this page as more becomes finalized.
That does not work. The player leave trigger is only for victory and defeat. I tried a trigger with the event player presses the quit button, with action set resources to 0. Did not work.
I can't figure this out. What is the true value of the attack speed if you set it to 0? I believe I've had some balancing errors on the assumption that it automatically made 0 as .01.
The reason for the loading screen key press dates back to a bug in the beta where the map would cause a desync without the key press. I have no idea whether it's still a problem.
I've been noticing many people complaining about the new popularity system. Both in these forums, and on Sc2mapster.com. Apparently, I'm one of the "lucky" few to have released a map under the right circumstances for it to become popular.
I'm making this post for two reasons.
For one, I'd like to give some input on the popularity system from the point of view of one who's been "successful" with it. Two, I'd like to say some things about my map. I will separate the topics, so if one disinterests you, skip it. I feel it is better to combine these two topics into a single post.
--
Everyone has been saying that getting a popular map is nothing more than luck; publishing before anyone else does. I would like to hope this is not true. I've put a lot of work into my map, as well as into figuring out how the new editor works. I did start working during the beta, which some people may say to be an advantage, however, I got into the beta by pre-ordering from Gamestop -- something anyone could have done, given that it was five dollars.
One thing that I've noticed is that the majority of people complaining do so because they've spent many, many hours coming up with an intricate level featuring as many unique, deep game-play elements as they can think of. I applaud for that. However, I believe these people fail to understand their target audience. In warcraft 3, I attempted to release some maps, but they were never popular. Or even good. I've come to the conclusion this is because I focused too much on the technical aspects than whether it is fun. I'm currently working on my computer science degree. Programming is my strong point. Programming has nothing to do with game design. Nothing at all. As far as I know, programmers for video games have nothing to do with the design process. They are the "monkeys". That's okay, though. At least we're not engineers. Engineers are the monkey's monkeys. Even that's okay. At least you engineers aren't sys admins.
With that said, I probably have just as many gripes with the system as anyone else. The foremost being the inability to host public tests. Almost all of my testing has been done in solo mode. It was not until recently that the map became popular enough for me to just join a game and ask if anyone's interested in helping me test, and people seemed honored to do so. During beta, I got maybe one or two public tests done. This was done by me going into other games of other maps, and asking if anyone wanted to help test a new Tower Defense. I felt like a jerk doing so. What other choice did I have?
Blizzard's statement on this has been that if a map is worthy of popularity, it will have a strong following on community websites. This might be true for some people; one thing I've noticed, however, is that the maps with the strongest following appear to be those which have achieved unique or technical milestones -- not those which would be popular on Battle.net.
Sc2mapster.com is a very good website. It has a great, helpful community. If you ever make a post asking a question about how to implement something in the editor, it will usually be answered almost instantly. Even if you have a particularly in-depth, technically-complicated inquiry, there will always be people interested enough in the topic that they will do their own research in order to answer you.
However, even with its outstanding community, it's simply not possible for them to give notice to every up-and-coming project that might be out there. Yes, anyone can upload their map projects, but when you do, they're put into a long database containing every uploaded map, sorted only by how recently they were updated. If you're looking for a particular type of game to try out, even though you can filter by category, there is simply too much content to easily sift through and try. Not all of it is good, and there are no ranking systems set up. Users may comment on projects, but you have to make an account with the site in order to do so. Making an account may sound trivial, but I know a lot of people hate doing so. It would be impractical for them to feature all new projects on their front page because then it would become as cluttered as their map database.
I'm not criticizing Mapster. They are an excellent site, and I frequently make posts there asking questions. Their shortcomings are only due to the fact that supporting and giving notice to every single project is simply too difficult given the volume of created content.
I therefore conclude that relying on communities is not the answer. One more thing about that -- not everyone is as socially oriented. Not everyone is as inclined to seek project support directly. It's easier if you can host games with the title "new map need testers" because doing so does not involve any social connection with others. Social connection is not everyone's strong point. It's certainly not mine.
Blizzard said they added this system in order to clear up the spam of DotA. This goal has failed. Currently, if a game is released with multiple game modes, each mode shows up as a separate map, with its own popularity bar. The top few pages consist of many duplicate entries. Even worse, I can't even change the default mode for my own map because it will just create a new version at the bottom and no one will see it. I desperately need to configure the lobby settings. There should be absolutely one instance of a map, with the ability to use a drop down menu to select which mode to join.
I try to play a few public games of my map on occasion. To see what people think. This often results in embarrassment. Especially when I first released the map. The initial inability to organize tests resulted in bugs popping up in team mode that I had no knowledge of. The inability to leave feedback for the creator makes this worse. There were a few versions where the game was absolutely unplayable due to bugs. It makes me wonder how the map initially became popular in the first place.
The inability to control when a game starts or to kick players is infuriating. There are players that like to join games and intentionally log out as soon as the timer starts just to piss off everyone. You have no fix for this. They can stay in the lobby and the game will auto start when it fills. And repeat.
I believe a good number of currently popular maps are stolen. The names of the authors are different than that of the maps in beta. It is of course possible they simply changed their name, but given that their accounts on Mapster were identical to their beta account names, this is unlikely. One that comes to mind is Red Circle TD. Standard Tower Defense has also been re-published by a few different people. This bothers me.
I always appreciate player feedback. Please, feel free to leave suggestions, impressions, complaints, and gripes in this thread. I read every single one of them, and I always reply. I make no promise I will implement your suggestion.
There are some things I will absolutely not change. For one, I will not give the Bunker its own attack. It's a Bunker. In all of the history of the Bunker, dating back to when the ancient Romans dug holes in the ground and poured gravel for protection with their bows and arrows, Bunkers never had their own weapons. They're Bunkers. They don't have weapons. They provide protection for those that do.
I will not make the game easier. I was brought up in a family that played video games. If I used the cheat codes in Doom 1 or 2, I got grounded. My dad kept track of these things. I've played the other TD's out there, and to me they are too easy. I'd like to believe my maps reflect my views on how games should be, as well as my personality. This should be evident by the fact that the Queen mobs lay eggs which hatch into larva which morph into more eggs which hatch into more larva (originally there was an issue where you couldn't kill the larva / eggs faster than they multiplied, resulting eventually in the entire map covered with eggs and larva. I've since added a timer which expires all eggs and larva).
I will not take out the different armor types. This prevents people from massing the same tower. From what I've seen, people love building Lasers. While Lasers, especially on sharks, are bitchin', it's not a tactic that works.
I will not add minigames between rounds. It's a chore to me to feel obligated to squeeze out every last bit of Minerals.
I cannot for the life of me figure out how to present to new players the fact that Bunkers can only attack if you put units in them. I've done everything I can think to do. I put a descriptive tooltip, I put a message that pops up. I don't understand why people do not get it. People also do not seem to understand how Heroes work. If anyone has any suggestions on how to improve the accessibility of my gameplay elements, please do let me know.
I'm aware the currently released version is low on content. I feel bad that the map has made it to the first page despite this. It does not deserve so. I am working on adding new versions as quickly as I can. The game has been out of two days. Using the data editor takes forever (for me, at least). I am obsessive about every single detail, but in order to satisfy my obsessive compulsions, I have to learn more about the editor. I am also taking 13 hours of summer class at UT Austin.
The next version should be released publicly tonight or tomorrow. I am currently testing it privately, and if anyone would like to aid in these private tests, I would greatly appreciate it. People seem to be excited for the "privilege" to help with testing, but it really is the other way around. Given my lack of social outgoing, it is a privilege to me to have others willing to help me test and give feedback. If an idea I have for a unit or race or gameplay element turns out to be unfun, I have no problem scrapping it (except for the aforementioned). I need feedback to determine whether it's fun.
The next version will have 40 levels, as well as a second race. The first race still lacks towers and units -- don't worry, it will have more towers to compensate for the fact that there are more levels. The new race is set up to play completely differently. It is set up around mazing and stacking. I am taking advantage of the added capabilities of the Galaxy editor to make towers with features that were nearly impossible in Warcraft 3.
Some of you also may have noticed that the current Hero has an inventory. The next version will have items.
The next version will have a sell button. As an added bonus, the sell button will even return your money. In this version, the sell version merely explodes your tower without refunding it. This is because I like explosions. And I come from a rich family. I don't need the money.
There will be a ready button to speed up the time between rounds. Like the new sell button, it will also have the added bonus of working correctly.
You're getting a lot here. You're getting buttons. You're getting buttons that work. That just work. You don't need to configure them. They work automatically. It's also a phone. It's a button, it works, and it's a phone. All in one. It's really four products. You're getting a lot here.
In case anyone was wondering, the way I was able to have units use abilities without screwing up their pathing was by ordering them to do something before their existing orders. This is a cool trick that you couldn't really do in Warcraft 3 (as far as I know). Most of you probably already know this, but in case you don't.
That's all I have to say so far about my map. Like I said before, I always appreciate feedback, complaints, suggestions, and testers.
I'm assuming some people's "coughs" are directed at me, given that each time I put up a new version, there is at least one bug, somewhere, that causes the game to be completely unplayable.
My map is on page one, but I didn't do anything to put it there. People just play it. I have no other choice than to upload it in order to get public tests done. I'm not a very outgoing person, and don't really have the means or the social skills to approach people privately for testing. As a result, a buggy map is on the first page.
Worst of all, I rarely even get to be in a game to watch people test it. Even when the map had game-breaking (literally) bugs, it would still make it near the top. People also mass bunkers and then get angry when they have no attack. It says bluntly in the tooltip for the bunker that it requires you put units in it. Just like the actual game! I don't get people. They are lemmings.
The popularity system doesn't do much to cater to the developers. Blizzard's argument is that people should post on community sites to get a following or a test group. But, like I said, I don't know how to do that. The minute this requires social interaction is when it becomes a chore for me. They've managed to turn something I love into something I fear.
Oh, I see. I didn't realize that, sorry! In my experience, even if you have a doctorate in computer science, making something fun is still the hardest part.
0
@hipnos14:
It's in the unit's actor.
0
It's great for displaying health. I'd like it to be blue. For Energy.
0
Title.
0
@s3rius:
I know how to code efficiently in general, as well as the syntax for the particular language in the editor. I just don't have any API calls memorized.
0
1) The events, Key Pressed, Button Clicked, etc, all say to only register for the event when it is needed, due to network traffic.
Does this mean you should use the event in the trigger if you really need it, or that you should have as many conditions as possible with the event. Does it still generate traffic if the condition fails? Does having a condition to narrow down the number of calls make any difference in terms of performance?
2) Is there any difference in terms of performance when using custom script versus UI?
0
Copied from my post on the Blizzard forums, which was copied from my project page:
I am bored of my tower defense for now. Starting something new.
Too Long, Didn't Read: I would greatly appreciate testers and consultants.
Reply here, http://www.sc2mapster.com/maps/vts/ , pm Vexal 525 in-game, pm Vexal on sc2mapster , email Vexal525@gmail.com
--------------
Copy and paste from my project page at sc2mapster:
From the maker of Vexal Tower Defense,
Vexal Team Survival.
Vexal Team Survival is a Hero Defense map. Hero Defense is a genre borrowed from Warcraft 3.
The goal of Vexal Team Survival is to stay as true as possible to the genre as it was in Warcraft. I will not be attempting to reinvent the genre from the ground up. That will be a job for maps released later in the span of Starcraft 2's lifetime. Instead, I have selected a few choice concepts to innovate and redesign, which were either completely impossible in the Warcraft editor, or too difficult and impractical to implement.
Currently, these choice design elements encompass:
- The Hero's control system. No, I will not be implementing a WASD movement scheme. I am not ready to reveal exactly how it will work.
- Hero weapon system. Given that Starcraft 2 has such a robust weapon system, this choice is a give-in.
- Hero spell / attack system. Again, I am not ready to reveal how it will work.
The above areas will be completely different than that of the traditional Hero Defense. As for the rest of the map, it will be polished with little additions that were not possible in Warcraft.
Areas which I have not yet finalized:
- Equipment / Item system.
- I would like to have a player-versus-player element. I am currently bouncing around ideas in my head. However, I will not force a system into the map just "because" if it does not feel smooth and connected.
While I am building off a genre I did not invent, I do not like to implement gameplay elements which were a unique, defining feature of a map released prior. People ask me, "Why don't you have interest in your TD?" "Why don't you have a mineral bank?" This is why.
What I need:
I normally work alone, and am more than capable of handling any aspect of the design and creation of map (or game in general), both technical and gameplay wise. However, my tower defense took more than two months (I began work in the beginning of June); I am obsessively meticulous; I scrutinize of every minute detail until I feel it perfect. I will not be accepting work from others (including custom assets, such as models or textures). The most difficult part of developing a game is the design. And making it fun. I do need a few people who are capable of blunt honesty, whom I can present versions of my map, or drafts of gameplay mechanics, and receive feedback on whether I designed a fun mechanism, or simply got carried away with attempting an impressive technical feat (which I often end up doing).
If you would like to fill this position, either post here, PM me here, email vexal525@gmail.com , or PM Vexal 525 in-game. I will contact you when I have some thing to test.
I will be updating this page as more becomes finalized.
- Vexal 525
0
@DarkFireDragoon:
The thing is, the player-leave trigger only fires upon victory or defeat. It doesn't do anything if a player simply exits.
0
@Gaurus: Go
That does not work. The player leave trigger is only for victory and defeat. I tried a trigger with the event player presses the quit button, with action set resources to 0. Did not work.
0
Does anyone know how to do this?
0
I can't figure this out. What is the true value of the attack speed if you set it to 0? I believe I've had some balancing errors on the assumption that it automatically made 0 as .01.
0
@RileyStarcraft:
The reason for the loading screen key press dates back to a bug in the beta where the map would cause a desync without the key press. I have no idea whether it's still a problem.
0
@KerenskyLI:
I tried that in Warcraft 3. Then people complain about the cinematic. People complain about the 30 second countdown timer.
0
I've been noticing many people complaining about the new popularity system. Both in these forums, and on Sc2mapster.com. Apparently, I'm one of the "lucky" few to have released a map under the right circumstances for it to become popular.
I'm making this post for two reasons.
For one, I'd like to give some input on the popularity system from the point of view of one who's been "successful" with it. Two, I'd like to say some things about my map. I will separate the topics, so if one disinterests you, skip it. I feel it is better to combine these two topics into a single post.
--
Everyone has been saying that getting a popular map is nothing more than luck; publishing before anyone else does. I would like to hope this is not true. I've put a lot of work into my map, as well as into figuring out how the new editor works. I did start working during the beta, which some people may say to be an advantage, however, I got into the beta by pre-ordering from Gamestop -- something anyone could have done, given that it was five dollars.
One thing that I've noticed is that the majority of people complaining do so because they've spent many, many hours coming up with an intricate level featuring as many unique, deep game-play elements as they can think of. I applaud for that. However, I believe these people fail to understand their target audience. In warcraft 3, I attempted to release some maps, but they were never popular. Or even good. I've come to the conclusion this is because I focused too much on the technical aspects than whether it is fun. I'm currently working on my computer science degree. Programming is my strong point. Programming has nothing to do with game design. Nothing at all. As far as I know, programmers for video games have nothing to do with the design process. They are the "monkeys". That's okay, though. At least we're not engineers. Engineers are the monkey's monkeys. Even that's okay. At least you engineers aren't sys admins.
With that said, I probably have just as many gripes with the system as anyone else. The foremost being the inability to host public tests. Almost all of my testing has been done in solo mode. It was not until recently that the map became popular enough for me to just join a game and ask if anyone's interested in helping me test, and people seemed honored to do so. During beta, I got maybe one or two public tests done. This was done by me going into other games of other maps, and asking if anyone wanted to help test a new Tower Defense. I felt like a jerk doing so. What other choice did I have?
Blizzard's statement on this has been that if a map is worthy of popularity, it will have a strong following on community websites. This might be true for some people; one thing I've noticed, however, is that the maps with the strongest following appear to be those which have achieved unique or technical milestones -- not those which would be popular on Battle.net.
Sc2mapster.com is a very good website. It has a great, helpful community. If you ever make a post asking a question about how to implement something in the editor, it will usually be answered almost instantly. Even if you have a particularly in-depth, technically-complicated inquiry, there will always be people interested enough in the topic that they will do their own research in order to answer you.
However, even with its outstanding community, it's simply not possible for them to give notice to every up-and-coming project that might be out there. Yes, anyone can upload their map projects, but when you do, they're put into a long database containing every uploaded map, sorted only by how recently they were updated. If you're looking for a particular type of game to try out, even though you can filter by category, there is simply too much content to easily sift through and try. Not all of it is good, and there are no ranking systems set up. Users may comment on projects, but you have to make an account with the site in order to do so. Making an account may sound trivial, but I know a lot of people hate doing so. It would be impractical for them to feature all new projects on their front page because then it would become as cluttered as their map database.
I'm not criticizing Mapster. They are an excellent site, and I frequently make posts there asking questions. Their shortcomings are only due to the fact that supporting and giving notice to every single project is simply too difficult given the volume of created content.
I therefore conclude that relying on communities is not the answer. One more thing about that -- not everyone is as socially oriented. Not everyone is as inclined to seek project support directly. It's easier if you can host games with the title "new map need testers" because doing so does not involve any social connection with others. Social connection is not everyone's strong point. It's certainly not mine.
Blizzard said they added this system in order to clear up the spam of DotA. This goal has failed. Currently, if a game is released with multiple game modes, each mode shows up as a separate map, with its own popularity bar. The top few pages consist of many duplicate entries. Even worse, I can't even change the default mode for my own map because it will just create a new version at the bottom and no one will see it. I desperately need to configure the lobby settings. There should be absolutely one instance of a map, with the ability to use a drop down menu to select which mode to join.
I try to play a few public games of my map on occasion. To see what people think. This often results in embarrassment. Especially when I first released the map. The initial inability to organize tests resulted in bugs popping up in team mode that I had no knowledge of. The inability to leave feedback for the creator makes this worse. There were a few versions where the game was absolutely unplayable due to bugs. It makes me wonder how the map initially became popular in the first place.
The inability to control when a game starts or to kick players is infuriating. There are players that like to join games and intentionally log out as soon as the timer starts just to piss off everyone. You have no fix for this. They can stay in the lobby and the game will auto start when it fills. And repeat.
I believe a good number of currently popular maps are stolen. The names of the authors are different than that of the maps in beta. It is of course possible they simply changed their name, but given that their accounts on Mapster were identical to their beta account names, this is unlikely. One that comes to mind is Red Circle TD. Standard Tower Defense has also been re-published by a few different people. This bothers me.
That is all I have to say about Battle.net 2.0.
========================================================
About my map, Vexal Tower Defense.
I always appreciate player feedback. Please, feel free to leave suggestions, impressions, complaints, and gripes in this thread. I read every single one of them, and I always reply. I make no promise I will implement your suggestion.
There are some things I will absolutely not change. For one, I will not give the Bunker its own attack. It's a Bunker. In all of the history of the Bunker, dating back to when the ancient Romans dug holes in the ground and poured gravel for protection with their bows and arrows, Bunkers never had their own weapons. They're Bunkers. They don't have weapons. They provide protection for those that do.
I will not make the game easier. I was brought up in a family that played video games. If I used the cheat codes in Doom 1 or 2, I got grounded. My dad kept track of these things. I've played the other TD's out there, and to me they are too easy. I'd like to believe my maps reflect my views on how games should be, as well as my personality. This should be evident by the fact that the Queen mobs lay eggs which hatch into larva which morph into more eggs which hatch into more larva (originally there was an issue where you couldn't kill the larva / eggs faster than they multiplied, resulting eventually in the entire map covered with eggs and larva. I've since added a timer which expires all eggs and larva).
I will not take out the different armor types. This prevents people from massing the same tower. From what I've seen, people love building Lasers. While Lasers, especially on sharks, are bitchin', it's not a tactic that works.
I will not add minigames between rounds. It's a chore to me to feel obligated to squeeze out every last bit of Minerals.
I cannot for the life of me figure out how to present to new players the fact that Bunkers can only attack if you put units in them. I've done everything I can think to do. I put a descriptive tooltip, I put a message that pops up. I don't understand why people do not get it. People also do not seem to understand how Heroes work. If anyone has any suggestions on how to improve the accessibility of my gameplay elements, please do let me know.
I'm aware the currently released version is low on content. I feel bad that the map has made it to the first page despite this. It does not deserve so. I am working on adding new versions as quickly as I can. The game has been out of two days. Using the data editor takes forever (for me, at least). I am obsessive about every single detail, but in order to satisfy my obsessive compulsions, I have to learn more about the editor. I am also taking 13 hours of summer class at UT Austin.
The next version should be released publicly tonight or tomorrow. I am currently testing it privately, and if anyone would like to aid in these private tests, I would greatly appreciate it. People seem to be excited for the "privilege" to help with testing, but it really is the other way around. Given my lack of social outgoing, it is a privilege to me to have others willing to help me test and give feedback. If an idea I have for a unit or race or gameplay element turns out to be unfun, I have no problem scrapping it (except for the aforementioned). I need feedback to determine whether it's fun.
The next version will have 40 levels, as well as a second race. The first race still lacks towers and units -- don't worry, it will have more towers to compensate for the fact that there are more levels. The new race is set up to play completely differently. It is set up around mazing and stacking. I am taking advantage of the added capabilities of the Galaxy editor to make towers with features that were nearly impossible in Warcraft 3.
Some of you also may have noticed that the current Hero has an inventory. The next version will have items.
The next version will have a sell button. As an added bonus, the sell button will even return your money. In this version, the sell version merely explodes your tower without refunding it. This is because I like explosions. And I come from a rich family. I don't need the money.
There will be a ready button to speed up the time between rounds. Like the new sell button, it will also have the added bonus of working correctly.
You're getting a lot here. You're getting buttons. You're getting buttons that work. That just work. You don't need to configure them. They work automatically. It's also a phone. It's a button, it works, and it's a phone. All in one. It's really four products. You're getting a lot here.
In case anyone was wondering, the way I was able to have units use abilities without screwing up their pathing was by ordering them to do something before their existing orders. This is a cool trick that you couldn't really do in Warcraft 3 (as far as I know). Most of you probably already know this, but in case you don't.
That's all I have to say so far about my map. Like I said before, I always appreciate feedback, complaints, suggestions, and testers.
-- Vexal 525
0
@OneTwoSC: Go
I'm assuming some people's "coughs" are directed at me, given that each time I put up a new version, there is at least one bug, somewhere, that causes the game to be completely unplayable.
My map is on page one, but I didn't do anything to put it there. People just play it. I have no other choice than to upload it in order to get public tests done. I'm not a very outgoing person, and don't really have the means or the social skills to approach people privately for testing. As a result, a buggy map is on the first page.
Worst of all, I rarely even get to be in a game to watch people test it. Even when the map had game-breaking (literally) bugs, it would still make it near the top. People also mass bunkers and then get angry when they have no attack. It says bluntly in the tooltip for the bunker that it requires you put units in it. Just like the actual game! I don't get people. They are lemmings.
The popularity system doesn't do much to cater to the developers. Blizzard's argument is that people should post on community sites to get a following or a test group. But, like I said, I don't know how to do that. The minute this requires social interaction is when it becomes a chore for me. They've managed to turn something I love into something I fear.
0
@Karawasa:
Oh, I see. I didn't realize that, sorry! In my experience, even if you have a doctorate in computer science, making something fun is still the hardest part.